The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-04-07
THE WoRKINGMEN,s MOVEMENT.

cess in population of sixty millions where
suffrage is practically universal. There are
too many classes for any one to rule the rest;
too many interests for single one to govern.
Each class is devoted first to its own interest,
and when any one class tries to lord it over
the rest, or arrogate to itself an undue degree
of authority or importance, the others will
naturally resist and combine against it. In
large sense the interest of one is the interest
of all, but the interest of all is not to be pro-
NOTED by making any one interest paramount
The common sense of the people tells them
this, and they will not submit to it. A gov
pie, and the whole is larger than a part
Even if class movement could succeed it
would probably be injurious to the general
welfare and misfortune to themselves. If
any single interest in this country the most
important and most numerously represented
of ALL should succeed in getting control of the
tent as to be able to shape the entire admins
tration of public affairs, it would doubtless be
a great misfortune, and situation full of dam
ger. A particular class coming into power
under such circumstances would be unable
and probably unwilling to do justice to other
classes, and in attempting to promote its own
interests at the expense of others would excite
the hostility Of ALL and bring on
series of conflicts which could
only result in revolution or anarchy
The organization of society is too
complicated, its interests too vast, too varied
and too evenly balanced to be governed in
such fashion. Government for all must be
government by ALL In popular government
no political movement can achieve any large
or permanent success that does not aim at the
welfare of the whole people and appeal to some
interest common to all classes.
The two most notable class movements in
our politics were the Native American, or
Know nothing movement and the Grange
movement. Both appealed to very large
class, both anticipated brilliant political ca
reer, and both failed. No other class move
ment in this country will ever appeal to
larger number of persons than the Native
American movement did, and no other will
ever represent larger interest than the
Grange movement, yet both failed simply
because they were class movements. They
did not appeal to the common interest of all
nor aim at the common welfare of all, there
fore they failed. Yet both were strong at the
beginning. In 1855 the Native American
party elected Governor and Legislature in
New Hampshire, Massachusetts,, Rhode ISL
and, Connecticut, New York, California and
Kentucky; and also elected part of its State
ticket in Maryland and Texas; and only lost
the States of Virginia, Alabama, Mississippi,
Louisiana and Texas by small majorities
against it. In 1856 Willard Fillmore, the Ma
tive American candidate for President re-
ceived popular vote of S74, 534,
and carried eight States. In the
same year it had fifteen to twenty Represent
atives in Congress and five Senators. This
looked like the beginning of great party,
but in less than four years it had completely
vanished. 1t was a class movement. The
more recent history of the Grange movement
or Patrons of Husbandry. is to the same point
1t never grew to the proportions or developed
the strength of the Native American move
-, Ct,4oo g..
successive years it polled large vote, elected
many members of different State Legislatures,
and its leaders fully expected it to become an
important factor in national politics 1t rep
resented very large interest, and those who
were engaged in the movement were honest,
disinterested and patriotic. Yet the Grange
movement failed in politics because it was a
class movement and endeavored to promote a
! single interest at the expense of others. The
organization is still kept up in some localities,
and is useful as a means of agricultural ad-
vancement, but as political movement it is
| dead
| The labor movement has entered politics.
1t is distinctively class movement, appealing
to workingmen and manual laborers only, and
aiming to promote their interests, if not at
the expense of others, at least without regard
| to others. 1t is a maxim of the knights OF
| Labor that the interest of one is the concern
of all, but this means among Knights only.
They do not recognize the operation of the
rule beyond their own ranks. Hence the
Labor movement is in the interest exclu.
sively of manual labor and those engaged in
it. 1t therefore represents but a small minor
ity of the entire American people. We dc
not deny that the laboring class as class ii
worthy, honest and patriotic; still it is but
one class out of many, and no more worthy
honest and patriotic than the rest. 1t has nt
rights and no wrongs that do not pertain t.
other classes. Numerically it is not the
largest class and the others combined greatly
outnumber it. The Labor movement then il
essentially class movement. Will it sue
! W. ,yl- ipo love